O.K. who knows their stuff about these t.v.'s? I want to get one soon but there all so danged confusing. I understand a little bit about the technology of each but are the specs really going to matter when I mount it on my wall. Thanks Guys!

I just bought a new TV a few days ago. I tried reading up on it before I went to look at anything, and from what I read it seemed that plasma would be the best, but at the store it was an LED TV that looked the best. I also bought a Blu-ray DVD player and the picture with that is amazing. It's not a 3D TV but with the Blu-ray it looks pretty close to 3D.

The technology keeps getting better, but you have to pay more for the latest technology. Also larger screen size costs more, obviously. So, what you get kind of depends on how much you're willing to pay. I went to the store thinking (hoping) I would spend $500, but paid a grand just for the TV.

I'd say that if it looks good in the store compared to the other ones in the store and if it's an HD TV then you probably can't go wrong. The specs can tell you which TV is "better" compared to other TV's, but if you want the best specs then you have to spend the most money.

What I think is the most important is the return policy of the store. You'll never know for sure until you get it home and try it out, so make sure you can return it with no hassles, just in case.

I work in TV post production and broadcast. I'd love to weigh in here!

GENERALLY speaking - plasma is considered the best display technology (PQ-wise) of the three mentioned here (really there are two technologies mentioned, as LED is a subset of LCD TVs) - and by that I mean a (good) plasma TV will most closely rival a CRT (tube) TV in terms of black levels and processing delay.

CRTs, being analog, have no processing delay. All digital display technologies else do, and it's one of the dirty little secrets of current TV technology. A high end plasma (say a Panasonic Viera or a Pioneer Kuro, if you can find one) will, on average, have less processing delay than LCDs. That means the video has a better chance of being synced to the audio. For certain sources like Blu-ray, the HDMI handshake will sometimes (but not always) help with the processing delay, but other sources like set top boxes (cable, satellite TV, etc.) won't always have that luxury. Watch broadcast television closely, and even on a CRT you'll often see that the picture is not perfectly in sync with the audio - and the video processing delay in digital TVs can only compound the problem - consider processing delay when purchasing a TV.

Next is black level, and this is another area where (again, GENERALLY speaking) plasmas come out on top. LCDs, because they MUST be backlit (either by CCFL or LED), will not produce the absolute black that you get from a CRT. Plasmas do a better job here because they do not use a backlighting technology. Sometimes you see insane, unrealistic contrast ratios (5,000,000:1) because newer LCDs will selectively turn on/off certain portions of a screen's backlight, but that is an artificial number and should not be used to indicate real world contrast ratio. When you see numbers like that, you can be certain that it was a sales team that came up with it, not an engineer.

You'll also find that, because plasmas do not rely on a backlight to create contrast, their acceptable viewing angles are generally wider, so there's more of a sweet spot when viewing.

Plasmas are far from perfect, though, and have several disadvantages when compared to LCDs - they cannot currently be manufactured as thin/light as their LCD counterparts. They are also generally less "green," consuming more energy and generating more heat than LCDs. Also, if you are looking for a giant screen, LCDs are available in larger sizes than plasma panels. Similarly, nobody manufactures a "small" plasma panel because it's too expensive - but I am going to assume we're talking about a nice big screen here!

Finally in LCDs corner, they can display a brighter picture (some might call it artificially bright) than plasma panels. Because of this, a room that receives a lot of direct sunlight might benefit from LCD. HOWEVER, a very good rule of thumb would be this: If you currently have a CRT in a room and it is bright enough for comfortable viewing, a plasma TV will absolutely be bright enough. The one room in my house where there is a TV is the great room, and the (CRT) TV is against a wall which has two windows, a sliding glass door off to the right side, an entry way into a bright living room to the left, a window in the back AND two skylights - and the CRT is plenty bright in all situations - so I know a decent plasma will be as well.

If I were purchasing today, I would not consider LCD for my viewing pleasure. I have seen both technologies up close in controlled environments, having received private viewing demos from some of the usual suspects, and I know where I'd put my money.

In my opinion, LCDs are good, plasmas are better. Oh, if they hadn't abandoned SED TV, a technology that knocked my socks off!!!

Just one quick note about stores. Most stores are the worst place to evaluate a display. Competing with fluorescent lighting and other TVs, you'll generally notice that all the controls you'd generally want to turn DOWN in your home (like contrast, saturation, sharpness) are turned up to their maximum values. High end AV showrooms will often have dark viewing areas, and the TVs will be calibrated. These are few and far between though, and it's just a shame that people have to evaluate TVs in such hostile environments!

OK - reading back it's long-winded, but I think you all know where I stand!

And Second, what about 3D? The reason I ask is that I'm old enough to remember 'quadrophonic', Betamax VCR's, and the recent format war that BluRay evidently won. My contention is that for now, 3D will be limited to non-broadcast sources (DVD's, starting a 3D format war?) as broadcast staions/networks have just finished spending millions to update nationally to HDTV. Would a further hardware upgrade at the networks/local stations to '3d everywhere' involve that big an investment again, or is it way less? And is there a single standard for 3D out there to be adopted?

I see you're in the 'first Alembic search' mode, and you'll certainly find enough friends here to help you along the way.

Wow, CJ that was more than what I'd expected and do I appreciate it. Plasma sets are what I've been looking at primarily for these reasons that I've read. 1. they don't have the fast action issues that LCD's have 2. The "movie" experience is better (deeper blacks) 3. They're cheaper and I can get a BIG A$$ set for the same price as a medium sized LCD 4. I can't afford an LCD with 120hz refresh rate, which is what I would get if I went the LCD route Thank you again for your input CJ and you other clowns too! ;)

can I just point out that IF you play video games (like I do, for inordinate amounts of time), they can damage plasma screens. I had a plasma a few year ago and my playstation 'burned' images into it. just a thought that probably doesn't matter

The difference between 720p and 1080p is enough to notice if you have TV's side by side. I'd get the 1080p if you don't mind shelling out the extra cash for it. And I've read that screen burn-in on plasma TV's is becoming a thing of the past. It takes quite a few hours to burn something in now, and I don't think the effect is permanent. Probably still an issue for gamers though.

I notice a big difference in 720p vs 1080p, it was actually quite startling. I got my 1080p tv last year, and was flat out amazed at how lifelike things were compared to 720p. Add a blu-ray player and you'll be blown away.

I have a side lit LED (samsung) television. Its a great t.v. and superthin.

Dont spend too much time worrying over what to get. I can pretty much guarantee that any differences that exist between LED/LCD/Plasma you wont even notice or think about when you get it into your house.

With my sidelit LED, any reviews pointed out the fact that the LED's sometimes come on during darker scenes, but to be honest I seldom, if ever notice this.

I just went through this whole LCD/LED/Plasma evaluation process, and ultimately decided on a 50" Panasonic Viera (Plasma). The basis for my decision was depth of black and fast tracking performance (think Star Wars = explosions). I understand this particular model has the same engine as the Pioneer Elite Plasmas. I've been very happy with it. I love the picture (Avatar on BluRay is incredible). My only gripe is that the menuing system is a bit odd, but I mainly use the menus from my cable box so it's no big deal.

Decent price too: bundled with a 5.1 Surround BluRay player at a big box retailer for under 2K

Just picked up a 55" LED LCD - LG 55LE5400 - for under $1500. Not the absolute best, but very good for the price.

The processing delay noted above becomes very apparent if you play Wii (or probably any video game) on it. The composite cable made it unplayable. Had to upgrade to the component cable (no hdmi available) and it's still noticeable, though usable.

24oowattman… First of, I'm sorry for not getting right back to this thread. I've been so busy lately, that I've been having to pick and choose what things I get to! I'm sure you can relate.

Regarding 720p and 1080p, there is a difference, but of course (as always) it depends on the source. Not all TV stations adhere to the same standards… For instance, FOX and ESPN broadcast 720p, but CBS and NBC broadcast 1080i (which is far more common, in the world of broadcasters). They both look great. the progressive frame rate naturally lend themselves toward sports and other material with quick lateral motion, but 1080i has a greater pixel density.

Darkstar01 is right, but the issue isn't nearly as bad as it once was. Earlier generation plasma TVs had a terrible problem with burn-in. It happened often and with little effort. It's not quite like that anymore, and many models of both LCD and Plasma now have screen savers that will kick in after a period of inactivity. Of course, that doesn't stop static graphics that stay on a screen for hours at a time in a game from causing problems. I think many gamers would pick LCD for this reason alone, but I've heard from people in our digital media department that games actually look better on a plasma. I don't have too much experience here, though.

1080p is good to have, in my opinion - especially if you're also using a nice AV receiver or some other device capable of scaling your video. For instance, in my HT setup, I use my AV receiver as a source selector, so it handles switching audio and video from all my sources, with just one cable going out to the TV. The receiver takes all my my signals and upconverts them to 1080i (my CRT cannot accept 1080p) - even composite signals. I don't stretch the picture, though, as I like watching video in its original aspect ratio. 1080p is a great format to upconvert to, if your TV can handle it - and of course, a Blu-ray authored to 1080p will be unrivaled!

Side-by-side, 1080p will usually outshine 720p (content being more-or-less equal), because its the same frame rate (60 fps), but a higher pixel density on the same size panel. Also, if you buy a TV that has a native 720 vertical resolution, it will have to scale down any 1080 video (most cable or FiOS-type broadcasts, and Blu-rays) to fit in the 720 lines of resolution - and then your picture will depend ultimately on the quality of the scaler built into the TV. You'd be much better off purchasing a TV that can handle 1080p natively, and thus any resolution below it.

And tomhug - if I were in the market, there's only one TV I'd buy right now, and it's a Panasonic Viera! I'm sure you're LOVING it! The Viera line is the first Panasonic to incorporate (albeit not fully) the Pioneer Kuro technology they purchased a few years ago. It's really the only TV I've seen that can rival the mythical Kuro.

2400 - I hope you continue to investigate and learn about the different technologies, and I hope you get a chance to see them in person in a decent environment - it makes such a difference.

Thanks again CJ. I'm probably going to get a Viera but in 720p. I'm not a hard core A/V nut to worry about the difference between the two resolutions, especially when my checkbook is screaming at me! CR rated the Viera sets highly despite having only two HDMI plugs. So, I think that's what is on the horizon. Thanks for all the input guys it really helps.

Just a couple of other tidbits if you haven't already pulled the trigger. If you are replacing a conventional TV with a flat panel, anything will seem good, but unless you really want to do it for the fewest bucks, I would bump up a bit in the specs (and it couldn't cost too much more).

On 1080p vs. 720p: With the lower prices on HDTVs this year, I think you want to buy up to 1080p. If this wasn't already obvious, the 1080 and 720 are the number of horizontal scan lines on the display. So the 1080p display has 50% more scan lines and can display much finer detail. That's a lot more dots on the TV screen as well - TVs are usually 16:9 ratio these days (there was a period where a slightly squarer 16:10 was common), so a 1080p display is typically 1920x1080 where a 720p display is 1280x720, so the 1080p display has more than double the pixels.

Over the air HDTV broadcasts have a specific amount of data that they can stream in their frequency bands. Some stations broadcast 720p where "p" is for "progressive scan". This means they send each of 720 lines every refresh cycle of the display. Other stations broadcast in 1080i where "i" stands for "interlaced scan". These stations send more 1080 lines per frame, but they don't have enough bandwidth to send all 1080 lines every refresh cycle, so they send the even lines first, then the odd, then even again at half the frame rate of the display.

When a 720p panel gets a 1080i signal, it collects the entire frame, then scales it down to 720 lines by throwing away data. The time delay that people have mentioned is the processing time of collecting a frame, then scaling it. This scaling task is also happening in a 1080p TV set - it can natively display 1080i (or 1080p) signals and has to make up additional data to fill in for the lower res 720p sources.

If you have directly connected devices, like a blu-ray player, XBox360 or PS3, they have full digital bandwidth and actually provide a 1080p signal - full resolution and every scan line in every refresh.

This is why you probably don't want to get a 720p TV today - the panel has lower native resolution, and almost every source other than 720p TV stations has to be scaled. The scaling takes compute horsepower and has some visual artifacts, so you'll take a hit on the best quality sources. Even a cheap upscaling DVD player will generally make 1080p output (and may not make 720P), so you'll end up with multiple conversion steps.

The other item is HDMI plugs. Not only do they carry the video and audio completely digitally, but they are required for maintaining encrypted content to the display. Even today, you see many devices that can only interface via HDMI - an AppleTV for instance. It's not just convenience of a single plug, it's the encryption that's being maintained throughout the path that's leading it this way. Blu-ray players output full resolution through HDMI only and generally can only put out a SD tv signal through analog jacks. If you don't have enough HDMI jacks, you can get an external switch which is not only a pain, but relatively expensive because it has to pay for encryption licenses too, or it won't be able to pass blu-ray content.

So future-proof yourself a bit by getting more 1080p and a few more HDMI jacks! At the small incremental dollars these days, you won't regret it.

Any thoughts about the LG Infinia 60PK950? I'm leaning towards plasma for the viewing angle issue. Also, I've been reading that plasma is superior for sports and movies. As I understand it, I can hook up this TV completely wireless ... the only wire coming out of the TV will be the power cord! Any suggestions or info greatly appreciated before I clean out the wallet. Also, anyone want a Sony 60" projection TV cheap - you pick up. Lol

Bill - sorry, with Christmas around the corner, it's been difficult to find to to get online, much less respond in a meaningful way. I have not seen this set in person, so I really can't comment too much - from what I've read, it compares well to other manufacturers flagship models (read - Panasonic Viera, since this is a model I HAVE been able to put a critical eye to). I have, however, heard several people state that the "magic wand" remote is kind of lame - do you have a universal remote system that this would be controlled by?

If I had the choice, I would probably not want to rely on a wireless technology for my picture, but maybe that's just me not experiencing this technology enough. I just feel like I wouldn't want to introduce something that could cause MORE signal delay than necessary. If I were mounting this on a wall, I'd certainly put a cable run in the wall, so I could be wired, and put a recessed clock outlet behind the TV for power.

Well I pulled the trigger. Got the 58" top of the line Panasonic. The deal I got was too good to turn down - at least $200 less than the cheapest Internet price I've found. The picture is outstanding. I haven't tried the 3D yet. I think I need to get a blu-ray player for that. Oh well, more stuff to learn about.